Why mass immigration explains the housing crisis

[spyguy]

12 minutes ago, Maynardgravy said:

Scepticism over true Grenfell death toll

This kind of tragedy highlights the kind of cramming and sub-letting abuse while a blind eye is turned. It won't free up any more houses but a decrease in HMO style cramming will reduce rent affordability IMO.

Id believe the met figures.

Id doubt 50% of the regustered resident were present.

Living elsewhere, subletting to people who were working.

[macca13]

1 minute ago, spyguy said:

Food is not scarce.

Lots of lrntils and like.

Not much kobi cows and abalones mind.

Have you seen Red Nose Day..  Of course that could never happen here with global warming and population increase and the wiping out of all of the fish and food pollinating insects! 

Can it? Of course it can.. people need to open their eyes.. we are heading to a disaster of our own making and it’s coming in our lifetime.. 

[spyguy]

Just now, macca13 said:

Have you seen Red Nose Day..  Of course that could never happen here with global warming and population increase and the wiping out of all of the fish and food pollinating insects! 

Can it? Of course it can.. people need to open their eyes.. we are heading to a disaster of our own making and it’s coming in our lifetime.. 

Bit too tinfpil hatted for me.

There is a priblem with massive population booms in 3rd world countries.

As a kid, i used to hawk round my Pennies for smiles tokens ound tge old ladies. Then there was ethipoia vand aid and all that.

Then i went to a number of african countries and saw how good the agri land was.

[PropertyMania]

1 hour ago, awkwardturtle said:

All of those links relate to global population pressures, they have nothing to do with immigration.

I can agree with this in a broad sense. However, the article talks a lot about babies born to foreign mothers. The GDP contribution of 2nd generation immigrants is entirely within our control (through education) The author should be less concerned about who their parents are and more focused on the potential of these 'forgien babies'.

 

Not sure it is when the 2nd and 3rd generation are more religiously extremist and often hate Britain far more than their parents / grandparents. In terms of numbers though, a 0.5% increase in population from net migration should be perfectly manageable. The vast majority of Brits already choose to live in areas far more densely populated than the UK average, so it's not about being "a small island". If you live in London, the population density is  kind of like living in a Britain of a billion people. 

[PropertyMania]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

I dont think Blair did. He was an Everythong Europe is great;cant see a problem person.

Before EE FOM, UK and EU migration balanced out.

In tge 90s I worked with numerous young, skilled French, Italian and Dutch. Improving their English, improving work skills. But - working.

Mrs spy is from this batch as she jacked in Italy and came to UK for a bit. Met me, got knocked up. Works and still works.

In exchange, france spain and portugal got self funded holiday makers and retirees.

The numbers were pretty balanced - about 2m uk retirees v. 2m misc EUers.

Before anyone buts in and sats But brits have sh1t 2nd language skillls... true ... but  not as sh1t as majnlands europe ability to create jobs.

Come EE, uk had a few years of skilled andor working migration. This was fine. I have a polush who arrived on a work visa a few years before EE.

However... now the uk and mainly EE migrants is a disaster.

Mrs spys class is 30% EU. Everysingle one is pupil premium i.e parent earns nothing.

There is one portugese. He moved here with his thai bar girl gf when his portugese dole ended.

All the kids are disruptive, cost a fortune in extra tuition and general hassle.

They even have a Roma couple wjos token tax credit jib is selling big ussues in the school when if tgey eventually turn up to pick their kids up.

Worst of all, the scum don't even learn to read and write properly.

(sarcasm)

 

[Hullabaloo82]

34 minutes ago, spyguy said:

UK migration numbers are a mess.

The home office does not track people like it should. Insane when we have a free at point of use health system (only one in world) and non cintrub benefits.

And, as we saw in the run up to brexit vote, they were reluctant to be honest on the numbers, leaving it to announce tge terfibke numbers way too late.

I would hazard tgere are 6m to 9m EU migrants in the uk. Theres ni registered ones, ones sleeping on sofa working cash in hand, and grandparents staying for months accessing nhs.

Tge numbers are that bad.

Then youve got tge nin eu migrants who should nit be here - bar studrnts at Unis.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

"I'd hazard"; based on what, exactly? And would 6 - 9m be a problem? What this debate needs is sober, fact based discussion. Sadly it rarely gets it. 

It's one of the many contradictory beliefs held on this site; housing is too expensive because (for some reason best known to themselves) politicians of all stripes deliberately bring in too many immigrants as part of a grand conspiracy whilst at the same time it's the bank's fault for being too lax with lending and if they'd just ****** off there would be plenty of free housing for all.

Which is It? How to explain the fact that the oft quoted leave areas of stoke, Grimsby, Mansfield and the like are NOT immigrant magnets, in fact quite the opposite; prices in these places are low as demand is so low as they export anyone with any talent at about age 18. 

The reality is that the UK has a very economically powerful capital which attracts people from all over the world, causing pressure on housing and services in the south east. The UK could take steps to remedy this problem by investing in economic growth in other areas and actively shifting government functions out of London. That it doesn't do that has ****** all to do with migration.

[spyguy]

4 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

"I'd hazard"; based on what, exactly? And would 6 - 9m be a problem? What this debate needs is sober, fact based discussion. Sadly it rarely gets it. 

It's one of the many contradictory beliefs held on this site; housing is too expensive because (for some reason best known to themselves) politicians of all stripes deliberately bring in too many immigrants as part of a grand conspiracy whilst at the same time it's the bank's fault for being too lax with lending and if they'd just ****** off there would be plenty of free housing for all.

Which is It? How to explain the fact that the oft quoted leave areas of stoke, Grimsby, Mansfield and the like are NOT immigrant magnets, in fact quite the opposite; prices in these places are low as demand is so low as they export anyone with any talent at about age 18. 

The reality is that the UK has a very economically powerful capital which attracts people from all over the world, causing pressure on housing and services in the south east. The UK could take steps to remedy this problem by investing in economic growth in other areas and actively shifting government functions out of London. That it doesn't do that has ****** all to do with migration.

The official numbers is about 2-3m non EE EU, and about 3m ascension countries. The unofficial - relatives on sofas etc - is another 3m.

80% of the non nationals in London are on benefits. Its not the jobs attracting them.

[spyguy]

9 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

"I'd hazard"; based on what, exactly? And would 6 - 9m be a problem? What this debate needs is sober, fact based discussion. Sadly it rarely gets it. 

It's one of the many contradictory beliefs held on this site; housing is too expensive because (for some reason best known to themselves) politicians of all stripes deliberately bring in too many immigrants as part of a grand conspiracy whilst at the same time it's the bank's fault for being too lax with lending and if they'd just ****** off there would be plenty of free housing for all.

Which is It? How to explain the fact that the oft quoted leave areas of stoke, Grimsby, Mansfield and the like are NOT immigrant magnets, in fact quite the opposite; prices in these places are low as demand is so low as they export anyone with any talent at about age 18. 

The reality is that the UK has a very economically powerful capital which attracts people from all over the world, causing pressure on housing and services in the south east. The UK could take steps to remedy this problem by investing in economic growth in other areas and actively shifting government functions out of London. That it doesn't do that has ****** all to do with migration.

No.

The biggest leave voting area was Bostons fenland.

Some of the schools are 80% EE.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/boston-in-lincolnshire-is-the-most-murderous-place-in-england-and-wales-home-office-figures-reveal-a6828571.html

Do you think a bunch of fenhoppers suddenly decided to start stabbing each other?

Another example, closer to me, is middlesbrough.

The centre is now iverwhelmed from all corners of the world.

In 40 years, streets have gone from being all brits to none.

The houses have been turned into slums and knicking shops. Theyve EE skleos on everything and half the ME and Africa hanging around dealing.

[highcontrast]

My comments to the link in my original post were written with somewhat of a angry hat on, the article (yes badly written perhaps) just reinforced things for me.

But before anyone jumps to conclusions that I'm an angry white 65 year old from Essex with a swallow tattoo on his hand who pretends to remember the good old days of the 2nd world war and who's not racist (but is actually a bit racist innit)... I'm actually a young (minded) non-white descendant of immigrants myself, although born and bred in blighty.

I do not have a problem with immigration per se, in fact I don't have a problem with controlled and well thought out migration at all...it's a good thing, but this free for all that that ***** Blair allowed is the issue...and always was the issue.

Ok...Maybe im preaching to the chior but...
Mass immigration has helped the property buying elite by increasing the demand for rental properties (including many politicians...esp that ***** Blair)...thus pricing those of us who just want to buy a place to live in. 
Mass immigration has helped the industrial elite (including many politicians and their peers...esp that ***** Blair ) by creating a surplus in labour and driving down the wage level.
Mass immigration has affected the lives of average brits by putting extra burden on infrastructure & such as schools/nhs/councils/benefits and obviously housing...not to mention general quality of life, which rarely gets mentioned (IMO).
It's like they (esp that ***** Blair) never gave a "single" thought to what the potential impact might be. In fact they could not give a flying cluck about the average brit...all IHMO.  But this (IMO) is "exactly" why the brexit vote went the way it did
 
I'm not sure why im angry as we know politicians are only looking out for themselves and their peers (or maybe we should all be angry?). But anyway not expecting everyone to agree with me or in fact say im factually correct...im just venting...soz
p.s. did i mention i think Blair is *****?

[spyguy]

14 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

"I'd hazard"; based on what, exactly? And would 6 - 9m be a problem? What this debate needs is sober, fact based discussion. Sadly it rarely gets it. 

It's one of the many contradictory beliefs held on this site; housing is too expensive because (for some reason best known to themselves) politicians of all stripes deliberately bring in too many immigrants as part of a grand conspiracy whilst at the same time it's the bank's fault for being too lax with lending and if they'd just ****** off there would be plenty of free housing for all.

Which is It? How to explain the fact that the oft quoted leave areas of stoke, Grimsby, Mansfield and the like are NOT immigrant magnets, in fact quite the opposite; prices in these places are low as demand is so low as they export anyone with any talent at about age 18. 

The reality is that the UK has a very economically powerful capital which attracts people from all over the world, causing pressure on housing and services in the south east. The UK could take steps to remedy this problem by investing in economic growth in other areas and actively shifting government functions out of London. That it doesn't do that has ****** all to do with migration.

6m-9m is a problem whrn 80% are claiming tax credits.

A family of 2 kids needs to earning 50k for their taxes to meet social spending.

Each tax credit vosts 40k year in cash benefits, hb, schooling and healthcare.

[spyguy]

1 minute ago, deadlyavenger said:

My comments to the link in my original post were written with somewhat of a angry hat on, the article (yes badly written perhaps) just reinforced things for me.

But before anyone jumps to conclusions that I'm an angry white 65 year old from Essex with a swallow tattoo on his hand who pretends to remember the good old days of the 2nd world war and who's not racist (but is actually a bit racist innit)... I'm actually a young (minded) non-white descendant of immigrants myself, although born and bred in blighty.

I do not have a problem with immigration per se, in fact I don't have a problem with controlled and well thought out migration at all...it's a good thing, but this free for all that that ***** Blair allowed is the issue...and always was the issue.

Ok...Maybe im preaching to the chior but...
Mass immigration has helped the property buying elite by increasing the demand for rental properties (including many politicians...esp that ***** Blair)...thus pricing those of us who just want to buy a place to live in. 
Mass immigration has helped the industrial elite (including many politicians and their peers...esp that ***** Blair ) by creating a surplus in labour and driving down the wage level.
Mass immigration has affected the lives of average brits by putting extra burden on infrastructure & such as schools/nhs/councils/benefits and obviously housing...not to mention general quality of life, which rarely gets mentioned (IMO).
It's like they (esp that ***** Blair) never gave a "single" thought to what the potential impact might be. In fact they could not give a flying cluck about the average brit...all IHMO.  But this (IMO) is "exactly" why the brexit vote went the way it did
 
I'm not sure why im angry as we know politicians are only looking out for themselves and their peers (or maybe we should all be angry?). But anyway not expecting everyone to agree with me or in fact say im factually correct...im just venting...soz
p.s. did i mention i think Blair is *****?

Most 2nd+ migrants are very anti migrants.

The polish migrants of 2006ish hate the balkan migrants of 2015ish.

Take their jobs, force up cost of housing, take school places, etc.

Strange that.

A simple requirement to earn 40k year and not having recourse to benefits will fix this, instantly.

[awkwardturtle]

41 minutes ago, macca13 said:

Say what? So if all the fish are being hunted to extinction, pollution and pesticides are killing all the pollinating insects, sea levels are rising and we import 65% of our food.. 

Whats the one thing we don’t want?

More people..

I wrote a whole reply and then realised my mistake. I misread your original post and thought that you were correlating global threats with net U.K. migration. I see now that you weren't, sorry about that.

I agree with you, we are doing irreparable damage to the planet (consumerism being the main culprit imho)

[spyguy]

4 minutes ago, deadlyavenger said:

My comments to the link in my original post were written with somewhat of a angry hat on, the article (yes badly written perhaps) just reinforced things for me.

But before anyone jumps to conclusions that I'm an angry white 65 year old from Essex with a swallow tattoo on his hand who pretends to remember the good old days of the 2nd world war and who's not racist (but is actually a bit racist innit)... I'm actually a young (minded) non-white descendant of immigrants myself, although born and bred in blighty.

I do not have a problem with immigration per se, in fact I don't have a problem with controlled and well thought out migration at all...it's a good thing, but this free for all that that ***** Blair allowed is the issue...and always was the issue.

Ok...Maybe im preaching to the chior but...
Mass immigration has helped the property buying elite by increasing the demand for rental properties (including many politicians...esp that ***** Blair)...thus pricing those of us who just want to buy a place to live in. 
Mass immigration has helped the industrial elite (including many politicians and their peers...esp that ***** Blair ) by creating a surplus in labour and driving down the wage level.
Mass immigration has affected the lives of average brits by putting extra burden on infrastructure & such as schools/nhs/councils/benefits and obviously housing...not to mention general quality of life, which rarely gets mentioned (IMO).
It's like they (esp that ***** Blair) never gave a "single" thought to what the potential impact might be. In fact they could not give a flying cluck about the average brit...all IHMO.  But this (IMO) is "exactly" why the brexit vote went the way it did
 
I'm not sure why im angry as we know politicians are only looking out for themselves and their peers (or maybe we should all be angry?). But anyway not expecting everyone to agree with me or in fact say im factually correct...im just venting...soz
p.s. did i mention i think Blair is *****?

Blair had his eye on becoming the first EU president.

Everything - dumb signalling on migrants, not sorting out restricting access to uk benefits, dumping on poor natives, etc, was thrown under the bus to achieve that.

Blotted his copy book with iraqv2. Negative political rep in Europe, toxic.

[Hullabaloo82]

3 minutes ago, spyguy said:

6m-9m is a problem whrn 80% are claiming tax credits.

A family of 2 kids needs to earning 50k for their taxes to meet social spending.

Each tax credit vosts 40k year in cash benefits, hb, schooling and healthcare.

3rd time of asking; 

Let's see some facts that that's the case. 

I love that Boston murder rate statistic. You do realise that it's based on a per capita calculation right? All it takes for a small place like Boston to have a higher per capita murder rate than a place approximately one hundred times it's size like London is for a feud to escalate leading to say 3 or 4 murders, given that each one of them is statistically equivalent to 30 or 40 in london. It could just as easily be a serial killer as eastern Europeans. 

Also, ever here of "cluster theory"? Chuck a handful of grains of rice up in the air and they don't all land alone exactly evenly spaced apart. There will be clusters and then other spaces with none at all. This is what leads to spurious crime scares in small towns which have their quinquennial crime wave; same thing happens in the town I live in which is roughly the size of boston. 

If have thought you'd understand how misleading statistics can be given that you're a C Eng?

[spyguy]

Just now, Hullabaloo82 said:

3rd time of asking; 

Let's see some facts that that's the case. 

I love that Boston murder rate statistic. You do realise that it's based on a per capita calculation right? All it takes for a small place like Boston to have a higher per capita murder rate than a place approximately one hundred times it's size like London is for a feud to escalate leading to say 3 or 4 murders, given that each one of them is statistically equivalent to 30 or 40 in london. It could just as easily be a serial killer as eastern Europeans. 

Also, ever here of "cluster theory"? Chuck a handful of grains of rice up in the air and they don't all land alone exactly evenly spaced apart. There will be clusters and then other spaces with none at all. This is what leads to spurious crime scares in small towns which have their quinquennial crime wave; same thing happens in the town I live in which is roughly the size of boston. 

If have thought you'd understand how misleading statistics can be given that you're a C Eng?

Per capita is the best way to measure murder rates.

The reality, is it was a twee, boring place where violent ctime was pretty much nonexistent.

Sure, you get odd blips but when to go from 0 murders to a handful every year then something has changed.

Ditto the knife murders in London. Those arent rice thrown up in the air. They are not random. 90% are black kids under 25.

[spyguy]

As far as evidence, the current system denies me, as a citizen, good stats.

The best I can get is the likes of

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

[Eddie_George]

I have to post this chart everywhere. Easy credit has caused HPI. I guess mass immigration may have indirectly caused problems by encouraging banks to lend for HMO BTLs, but credit is the main driver.

[Hullabaloo82]

2 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Per capita is the best way to measure murder rates.

The reality, is it was a twee, boring place where violent ctime was pretty much nonexistent.

Sure, you get odd blips but when to go from 0 murders to a handful every year then something has changed.

Ditto the knife murders in London. Those arent rice thrown up in the air. They are not random. 90% are black kids under 25.

Read the link. The article itself says there were 2 (2!) murders. This was in 2015 by the way. 

You're right about the knife crime not being random but that only supports my theory that comparing a place like Boston with London is utterly pointless. 

What's the 2017 murder rate for Boston (or does that inconveniently not support your argument?)

[Will!]

13 minutes ago, deadlyavenger said:

Ok...Maybe im preaching to the chior but...
Mass immigration has helped the property buying elite by increasing the demand for rental properties (including many politicians...esp that ***** Blair)...thus pricing those of us who just want to buy a place to live in. 
Mass immigration has helped the industrial elite (including many politicians and their peers...esp that ***** Blair ) by creating a surplus in labour and driving down the wage level.
Mass immigration has affected the lives of average brits by putting extra burden on infrastructure & such as schools/nhs/councils/benefits and obviously housing...not to mention general quality of life, which rarely gets mentioned (IMO).
It's like they (esp that ***** Blair) never gave a "single" thought to what the potential impact might be. In fact they could not give a flying cluck about the average brit...all IHMO.  But this (IMO) is "exactly" why the brexit vote went the way it did
 
I'm not sure why im angry as we know politicians are only looking out for themselves and their peers (or maybe we should all be angry?).

I found this an interesting watch:  Who Should We Let In? Ian Hislop on the First Great Immigration Row  It's not available right now, but I'm sure it'll be repeated.

Until the 1905 Aliens Act, the UK had freedom of movement with the entire world.  The first two points you make were undoubtedly part of the reasons for this.  Also there was no welfare state, NHS or state education system and social housing was only for the industrious poor.

 

[awkwardturtle]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Nope.

Naive thinking uk state education will determine outcomes. Its just not thst good - 50% of uk natives fail to achieve 5 gcses passes.

What matters is edycation and family culture.

Bradford is on about its 4th generation of mipuris. The current batch is worse than the lot who came across in the 60s.

I agree with you. My education was shit - my first two years of IT were done using obsolete BBC Micros, this wasn't the 80s this was in 1998!!

But you are making my point for me. The article plants the seed that having all these babies with forgien parents is terrible. My argument is that these babies have the same education as 'the natives', their heritage is largely* irrelevant to their prosperity and what they offer the country (* point conceded about language barrier of parents etc). It is OUR failing to provide a decent education which makes us uncompetitive with an unskilled workforce, but this is true for everyone's children, not just immigrants.

[spyguy]

4 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Read the link. The article itself says there were 2 (2!) murders. This was in 2015 by the way. 

You're right about the knife crime not being random but that only supports my theory that comparing a place like Boston with London is utterly pointless. 

What's the 2017 murder rate for Boston (or does that inconveniently not support your argument?)

Hard to find.

Ive been on Linc police site. Thry dont break out murder from other violence. And they limit srats to 2 years.

[macca13]

12 minutes ago, awkwardturtle said:

I wrote a whole reply and then realised my mistake. I misread your original post and thought that you were correlating global threats with net U.K. migration. I see now that you weren't, sorry about that.

I agree with you, we are doing irreparable damage to the planet (consumerism being the main culprit imho)

But the question is if the scientists are correct and we run out of fish to eat in 2043 and crops start to fail due to lack of pollination.. 

Is importing 1 million people every couple of years a good idea? 

[macca13]

29 minutes ago, deadlyavenger said:

My comments to the link in my original post were written with somewhat of a angry hat on, the article (yes badly written perhaps) just reinforced things for me.

But before anyone jumps to conclusions that I'm an angry white 65 year old from Essex with a swallow tattoo on his hand who pretends to remember the good old days of the 2nd world war and who's not racist (but is actually a bit racist innit)... I'm actually a young (minded) non-white descendant of immigrants myself, although born and bred in blighty.

I do not have a problem with immigration per se, in fact I don't have a problem with controlled and well thought out migration at all...it's a good thing, but this free for all that that ***** Blair allowed is the issue...and always was the issue.

Ok...Maybe im preaching to the chior but...
Mass immigration has helped the property buying elite by increasing the demand for rental properties (including many politicians...esp that ***** Blair)...thus pricing those of us who just want to buy a place to live in. 
Mass immigration has helped the industrial elite (including many politicians and their peers...esp that ***** Blair ) by creating a surplus in labour and driving down the wage level.
Mass immigration has affected the lives of average brits by putting extra burden on infrastructure & such as schools/nhs/councils/benefits and obviously housing...not to mention general quality of life, which rarely gets mentioned (IMO).
It's like they (esp that ***** Blair) never gave a "single" thought to what the potential impact might be. In fact they could not give a flying cluck about the average brit...all IHMO.  But this (IMO) is "exactly" why the brexit vote went the way it did
 
I'm not sure why im angry as we know politicians are only looking out for themselves and their peers (or maybe we should all be angry?). But anyway not expecting everyone to agree with me or in fact say im factually correct...im just venting...soz
p.s. did i mention i think Blair is *****?

Blair and his wife are pure evil.. I wish we could put them in prison.. 

[Will!]

6 minutes ago, awkwardturtle said:

The article plants the seed that having all these babies with forgien parents is terrible. My argument is that these babies have the same education as 'the natives', their heritage is largely* irrelevant to their prosperity and what they offer the country (* point conceded about language barrier of parents etc). It is OUR failing to provide a decent education which makes us uncompetitive with an unskilled workforce, but this is true for everyone's children, not just immigrants.

That's a non sequitur.  The single biggest determinant of a child's educational performance is their parents' attitude to education.

[awkwardturtle]

1 minute ago, macca13 said:

But the question is if the scientists are correct and we run out of fish to eat in 2043 and crops start to fail due to lack of pollination.. 

Is importing 1 million people every couple of years a good idea? 

Right I see your point. However if we truly are 25 years away from environmental disaster on such a scale, with a population of 65 million would a reduction of 1-2 million make any difference? What is a good number?